This is Gentoo's testing wiki. It is a non-operational environment and its textual content is outdated.
Please visit our production wiki at https://wiki.gentoo.org
Talk:Ebuild repository
This is a talk page. Please add newer comments below older ones, and sign your comments using four tildes (
~~~~).
When adding a new section (at the bottom of the page), please mark it as "open for discussion" by using {{talk|open}} so it will show up in the list of open discussions.Using unsafe overlays
the syntax shown in the code-segment for Mask all packages in an overlay does not work for me (using portage-2.2.20)
it allways complains with the message: Invalid atom in /etc/portage/profile/package.mask: */*::profile-name
/etc/portage/package.maskMask all packages in an overlay*/*::overlay-name # seems to be invalid syntax!
should be removed from that wiki if i am not wrong at all. --Creich (talk) 15:15, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
- Syntax is correct, at least for portage-2.2.18. Should you have problems with it, the forums is a better place for getting help. --Charles17 (talk) 05:52, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
Tools section
Maybe it's good idea to add tools section (i.e. with overlint-cli and repoman etc) or just links to articels about them? I can handle this. --Emc (talk) 10:17, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
- I've restructured it a bit. Tool-specific hints and sections are now welcome under "Supporting tools". --SwifT (talk) 11:59, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
Overlay priorities
I know it may seem a little chaotic, but shell variable expansion (or should I say substitution ? I'm not sure if I misuse the two or people around me) is not that easy to describe ;) This magic works on my setup, please test it though. Also, I think this should be documented in the overlay guide, as it's quite an important feature of overlay handling. I'd be glad to help to develop the doc, so developers, just leave note on my page, if you're interested P.S.: I'm new to wiki-style editting, so excuse me if I didn't follow some guidelines. Smartass 08:03, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
- It might be better to move the priority handling in layman to the Layman article instead, and keep the Overlay article "pure" in its intend. --SwifT 08:25, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks SwifT for having a look at the article and thanks a lot for the corrections :) Just one remark: I don't fully support your formulation about the portage tree being added into the overlay structure as I believe it does not truly reflect the implementation, the python file reference I added in Overlay#References treats the portage tree as an overlay like any other, but performs a check whether the overlay that is currently being processed is PORTDIR (line 252 in that file) Smartass 09:11, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
- True, I stand corrected. The code indeed only assigns a priority once and as such, for the portage tree, looks if it is defined in the overlays as well. However, I wouldn't refer to the commit nor the code in the wiki - first of all, the code will change (on my system it is located elsewhere and the line numbers are not correct) and the commit isn't interesting for most users (we would otherwise provide too much data in this article). I'll update the sentence to remove the "as well". --SwifT 09:19, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
- Errr, not sure if I expressed myself correctly. What I meant was that your formulation makes it sound like the portage tree is not in the overlay structure which is not true. Yeah, I'm getting beyond pedantic ;D Smartass 09:45, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
- True, I stand corrected. The code indeed only assigns a priority once and as such, for the portage tree, looks if it is defined in the overlays as well. However, I wouldn't refer to the commit nor the code in the wiki - first of all, the code will change (on my system it is located elsewhere and the line numbers are not correct) and the commit isn't interesting for most users (we would otherwise provide too much data in this article). I'll update the sentence to remove the "as well". --SwifT 09:19, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks SwifT for having a look at the article and thanks a lot for the corrections :) Just one remark: I don't fully support your formulation about the portage tree being added into the overlay structure as I believe it does not truly reflect the implementation, the python file reference I added in Overlay#References treats the portage tree as an overlay like any other, but performs a check whether the overlay that is currently being processed is PORTDIR (line 252 in that file) Smartass 09:11, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
Ok SwifT, I suppose removing the too "under the hood" stuff won't degrade usability of the provided information. And if someone really wants to know why...well, he will have to either ask, or do some research and dive into the code. Sounds reasonable. Cheers :) Smartass 10:48, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
Splitting layman priorities handling
I support this move. Shall I do it, or do you want to do it yourself, SwifT ? Smartass 09:11, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
- It's a wiki, you go ahead ;-) --SwifT 09:19, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
Deprecated stuff
According to man 5 make.conf the variable PORTDIR_OVERLAY is deprecated.
PORTDIR_OVERLAY = "[path] [different-path] [etc...]" Defines the locations of other repositories. This variable is deprecated in favor of settings in repos.conf. This variable is a space-delimited list of directories. Defaults to no value.
The article should be updated reflecting repos.conf instead of deprecated stuff.
- Charles17, be sure to click the signature and timestamp (it is a button on the edit toolbar directly above this text box; you can see I used it at the end of this entry) when you reply so that we can easily see who wrote what on the discussion pages... In response to your observation, I marked the page as Dated so that others can see it is not up to par on the changes that have been happening with the repositories recently. If you have appropriate knowledge feel free to update the page. Either myself or someone working on Portage will hopefully get around to it. Thanks for taking note! --Maffblaster (talk) 16:38, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
Introduction is outdated/obsolete
The name 'overlay' is deprecated. Portage handles everything as regular repositories for many years now, and there is being 'laid over' since then. The Overlays project (historical name) is encouraging the use of more correct term ebuild repository. Would be nice if this page didn't roll everything back to 2009. -- Michał Górny (talk) 09:14, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
- Hi Michał Górny (MGorny) , how would you like to address the problem? Create a redirect from this article to a new "Repositories" article? After talking to Mart Raudsepp (leio) , we also will need to update the Overlays project title as well. --Maffblaster (talk) 00:00, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
- Someone with suitable authorization should simply move this article with all its translations to ebuild repository, keeping this article as an explanation why "Overlay" is deprecated. --Charles17 (talk) 07:28, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
- Redirect will work with problem for "sub translated" pages. It should be full migration to new article with all sub translated pages without any redirect. Also i believe we should change other articles (where it possible) and replace "layman -a overlay-name" with new repos.conf method. --Cronolio (talk) 14:42, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
- Layman still exists and seems to work. So I disagree to replacing "layman -a overlay-name" (at this moment). But we need to care for all the »Pages that link to "Overlay"« https://wiki.gentoo.org/index.php?title=Special:WhatLinksHere/Overlay&limit=500 --Charles17 (talk) 14:54, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
- he he. i dont know how it do other translators, but i am always do my translation like [[Article]] > [[Article/ru|Article]], where translated version is exist. it is because redirect is not good idea and also into Charles17 list can be added Special:WhatLinksHere/Overlay/ru --Cronolio (talk) 16:35, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
- *.overlays.gentoo.org websites should be moved to *.repos.gentoo.org too (or what likes @gentoo) --Cronolio (talk) 10:26, 24 January 2017 (UTC)
- Good idea. bug #607030--Charles17 (talk) 11:00, 24 January 2017 (UTC)
- Nothing else to discuss here. We'll continue the greater conversation on the bug created by Charles17 (bug #607030). Closing. --Maffblaster (talk) 23:38, 3 May 2017 (UTC)